• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

[Videocardz]First GTX Titan X 3DMark benchmarks!

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
9438!!!

That is way better than the OP. what is going on here? Is the OP results bogus? Or is this one bogus?

When are the reviews supposed to hit? I wonder how the Titan X can be that much faster, it runs at lower clocks than the 980. 135% gtx980 performance should be about right for a Titan X at stock clocks.

What I think wil make it even more special is overclocking. I bet we will see overclocking as high as 40% over its default clocks. The performance improvements depend on how high the stock Titan X boost right out of the box.
 
Looks about right for the 3dMark (graphics) results. ~35% in that, and ~33% in games on average.

116 x 1.33 = 154

As i posted, NV reusing the titan blower is fine but that blower drops off significantly when TDP is higher than 225, as seen in Titan Black where it already gets noisy & hot. If NV push clocks on Titan X to get 50% above 980 (170W x 1.5 = 255W), they're looking at >250W and that blower just isn't capable to remain cool & quiet.

But it should have the OC headroom to allow enthusiasts to manually crank up the blower or put it on water.

No it's not fine on a card that cost a 1000$ or more. That cooler is crap, replacing those crappy coolers got me about a 50C reduction in the temperature. Overclocking a GK110 is too much for that cooler. AMD is right to include liquid coolers on its top cards but there should also be a version available with just an FC block for folks with custom loops.
 
Does it need to catch the Titan X? As long as it beats the 980 I expect it to be priced between $500-$700. I'd like AMD to get the performance crown for competitions sake, but it'd still be the second fastest GPU for hundreds less than the fastest.

This.

If it can hit 85-90% of the performance for roughly half the price, it will be 390X-CF vs. Titan X at a similar price. Guessing the 390X will win that. 🙂

So then the $800 980 Ti/1080 comes out and wrecks it? Yeah, that's good for competition...
 
No it's not fine on a card that cost a 1000$ or more. That cooler is crap, replacing those crappy coolers got me about a 50C reduction in the temperature. Overclocking a GK110 is too much for that cooler. AMD is right to include liquid coolers on its top cards but there should also be a version available with just an FC block for folks with custom loops.

It's going to be a repeat of the first Titan, similar performance gap to the 680 at $1000, you bought 2! Why is it not fine now?
 
Back
Top